I/P Engine, Inc. v. AOL, Inc. et al

Filing 935

ORDER denying 923 Renewed Motion to Compel Deposition of Dr. Beckerand for Enlargement of Time to Oppose Plaintiff's Motion for Post-judgment Royalties; directing defendants to respond to plaintiff's Motion for an Award of Post-Judgment Royalties within ten days of entry of this order; permitting plaintiff to file a reply within five days of defendants' response. Signed by District Judge Raymond A. Jackson and filed on 5/1/13. (mwin, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Fl LED FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Norfolk Division I/P ENGINE, INC., EHK, US DISTRICT COURT NORFOLK, VA Plaintiff, V. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:llcv512 AOL INC., et a/., Defendants. ORDER Before the Court is Defendants' Renewed Motion to Compel Deposition of Dr. Becker and for Enlargement of Time to Oppose Plaintiffs Motion for Post-judgment Royalties. On April 17, 2013, the Court entered an order directing Plaintiff to respond to the Defendants' motion on an expedited basis. The Court also directed the Defendants to forgo filing a reply brief in support of their motion. Having consideredthe pleadings, the Court finds no basis to permit further discovery on Plaintiffs Motion for an Award of Post-Judgment Royalties (ECF No. 822). Accordingly, Defendants' Renewed Motion to Compel Deposition of Dr. Becker and for Enlargement of Time to Oppose Plaintiffs Motion for Post-judgment Royalties is DENIED. Defendants are ORDERED to respond to Plaintiffs Motion for an Award of Post-Judgment Royalties WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS of the entry of this Order. Plaintiff is permitted to file a reply to Defendants' response WITHIN FIVE (5) DAYS of the entry of Defendants' response. In the event that the Court finds that oral argument would assist its decisional process, it will notify the parties. IT IS SO ORDERED. RaymoncfA.Jackson Norfolk, Virginia May 1 ,2013 United States District 3ud&